The present invention relates to a gun lock for a hand gun, such as a pistol or rifle, to prevent the owner or any other person who is authorized to use the gun from firing the gun at times when it is inappropriate or dangerous to do so.
Mechanical gun padlocks are designed to be installed on the guns in a position behind the trigger to block the trigger from moving rearward and firing the gun. Mechanical gun locks have also been installed within guns to prevent movement of the firing pin or other parts of the firing mechanism unless disabled with a key. Such gun locks use a physical key that can be easily duplicated, and the locks themselves can be compromised by means of a master key or a lock pick. These gun locks can therefore be opened by anyone in possession of one of the keys. With such gun locks it is not possible to restrict the use of the gun to the gun owner or to some other person who is licensed or otherwise authorized to use the gun, or to restrict the use of the gun in any other way, either accidentally or otherwise.
The aforementioned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/763,951, filed Feb. 11, 2013 (now U.S. Pat. No. 8,893,420) discloses a gun lock system which uses a “smartphone,” such as an Apple “iPhone,” with a suitable application (“phone app”) as an electronic key to unlock the gun. The smartphone transmits biologic identification (“BioID”) data about a person to an electronic lock on the gun which, in turn, matches it with pre-stored data and unlocks the gun if a proper match is found. This system allows only the gun owner (or some other person who is licensed or otherwise authorized), who has originally supplied their BioID data to the gun lock for storage, to use the gun. The system is difficult to compromise and yet allows the gun to be unlocked by any smartphone that can collect BioID data and transmit it to the gun. This system avoids the problem of unlocking a gun when the user's smartphone has been lost, stolen or broken or has been replaced by a new one.
Unfortunately, even the owner of a gun or another person otherwise properly authorized to use the gun (hereinafter “first person”) may have the intention, as an act of anger, revenge, hostility, mental illness or the like, to use the gun inappropriately and thereby cause bodily harm or death to another human being. In such instances, it would be desirable to allow a second person, who may or may not also have his/her BioID data stored in the gun to allow his/her use of the gun to override the gun lock control by the first person. It would be desirable if this second person, who may or may not be an officer of the law, were permitted to lock the gun and prevent its inappropriate use.
Unfortunately, too, even the owner of the gun or another person authorized to use the gun (the “first person”) may act carelessly, for example on a hunting trip or at a firing range, and accidentally point the gun and quite unintentionally shoot a second person. This happened, for example, to the then U.S. Vice President Richard “Dick” Cheney while participating in a quail hunt on a ranch in Kenedy County, Texas. V.P. Cheney accidentally shot a friend, Harry Wittington, a 78-year-old attorney who was along on the hunting trip.
It would be desirable if the gun were automatically prevented from firing when and if it were inadvertently aimed at the second person.
Similarly, if a gun, after being unlocked by a first person who is authorized to use it, is intentionally grabbed away by a second person and pointed at the first person, it would be desirable if the gun were automatically prevented from firing.
In addition, within certain geographical areas such as (1) in the vicinity of a school, place of worship or other location where people congregate, (2) near a particular person who, as a government official or other VIP, may be under a heightened danger gun violence, or (3) near a person that has obtained a protective order against someone else who has threatened gun violence, it would be desirable if a gun (any gun) in such area were prevented from firing.
Further, when a security officer is authorized to carry and use a gun within a prescribed area, such as an airport or a shopping mall, it would be desirable to prevent his/her use of the gun in any and all geographical areas outside of the prescribed area.
Moreover, it would be desirable to prevent the firing of a gun, even by the owner or another person otherwise properly authorized to use the gun, when such owner or authorized person is intoxicated or otherwise acting in less than a sane and sober manner.
It would also be desirable to prevent the firing of a gun in situations where the owner, or another person otherwise properly authorized to use the gun, has not planned in advance to make use of the gun. In this way, it may be possible to avoid unpremeditated uses of the gun that may occur in the so-called “heat of passion.”
Finally, it would be desirable to override all of the aforementioned safety precautions in the case of imminent danger to a person in possession of a gun, where immediate use of the gun is necessary, such as when a hostile third party threatens bodily injury or even death.